Pope John Paul II on Christian-Jewish Relations: His Legacy, Our Challenges The Inaugural Annual John Paul II Lecture on Christian-Jewish Relations John T. Pawlikowski, O.S.M., Ph.D. Catholic Theological Union, Chicago, IL March 1, 2012 Center for Christian-Jewish Learning Boston College www.bc.edu/cjlearning
24
Embed
Pope John Paul II on Christian-Jewish Relations: His ... · 0 Pope John Paul II on Christian-Jewish Relations: His Legacy, Our Challenges The Inaugural Annual John Paul II Lecture
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
0
Pope John Paul II
on Christian-Jewish Relations:
His Legacy, Our Challenges
The Inaugural Annual John Paul II Lecture
on Christian-Jewish Relations
John T. Pawlikowski, O.S.M., Ph.D.
Catholic Theological Union, Chicago, IL
March 1, 2012
Center for Christian-Jewish Learning
Boston College
www.bc.edu/cjlearning
1
Introduction of John T. Pawlikowski, O.S.M.
The Other Polish Priest
March 1, 2012
The entire world recognizes the historic significance of Pope John
Paul II’s ministry of reconciliation between Christians and Jews, and
his pilgrimages to Auschwitz, the Synagogue of Rome, and Israel
were among the greatest of the twentieth century’s spiritual journeys.
No one is surprised that our Center would honor his ministry with a
lecture series which we inaugurate this evening. But there is another
priest of Polish background whose own pilgrimage has shown the
way to friendship between Jews and Christians for me and many
others and, of course, that is John Pawlikowski, O.S.M. He will
never receive the global acclaim of that Pope, but my guess is that
John would be a close competitor for miles traveled in service to the
building of that friendship. When recalling John Paul II, I am very
conscious of an important question that we should ask if we are to
grasp the efficacy of that Pope’s ministry: Would he have been able
to accomplish what he did without such spiritually energetic and
faith-filled leaders as John Pawlikowski? For me, the answer is
clearly no and my deeply felt gratitude for that Pope is united with a
thankfulness for our other Polish priest who is Professor of Social
ethics at the Catholic Theological Union in Chicago and director of
its program in Catholic-Jewish studies. It is a real joy for me that he
accepted the invitation to give the first lecture in this series and I
cannot think of a better way for it to begin.
I have heard John speak on numerous occasions and I have read
many of his writings, and there have been more than a few of those.
He is the author or editor of more than fifteen books and of countless
articles, and his writings have been translated into at least nine other
languages. For many, both Christians and Jews, these published
works have been important resources for the navigating of currents
in ethics and faith after the horrors of the Shoah. The clarity and
forceful expression of his writings accurately reflect the direct
2
spiritual force of the man who wrote them.
In addition to his academic work, John has been a leader in a broad
range of activities and engagements. He served for six years as
President of the International Council of Christians and Jews.
President Carter appointed him to the United States Holocaust
Memorial Council in 1980, and he was reappointed to three
successive terms on the Council by Presidents Bush and Clinton. He
served for many years on the Advisory Committee for Catholic-
Jewish Relations of the United States Conference of Catholic
Bishops.
And, of course, he has been honored with all sorts of awards, by his
home diocese of Chicago, by institutions such as Hebrew Union
College, and the American Jewish Committee, as well as by the
government of Poland. There was only one recognition that made me
raise my eyebrows. John has been officially declared by the
Governor of the State of Nebraska to be an Honorary Admiral, but it
is in the Navy of Nebraska which, as you know, is a land-locked
state. Well I looked it up and it turns out to be the highest honor that
the State of Nebraska gives.
In addition to hearing John present formal lectures and to reading his
writings, I have received the gift, as so many have, of coming to
know him personally. When I first met him, he seemed to take
particular satisfaction in pointing out to me that his religious order,
the Servites, had already been an actor on the stage of history for two
centuries before the Jesuits showed their face. You gave me the
sense, John, that there was no need for us to show up at all. I am
happy to point out however that, before he went to the University of
Chicago for his doctorate, he did his undergraduate studies at Loyola
University of Chicago. I have learned much from my conversations
with John, but my warmest memory is when we found ourselves
together at Notre Dame for an interfaith meeting and, immediately
before the discussions began, our beloved host, Rabbi Michael
3
Signer, was diagnosed with the pancreatic cancer that would soon
take his life. John was a spiritual companion and close friend of
Michael and he immediately demonstrated leadership and brought
together Jews and Christians in a healing service for Michael who
was present at it. I was deeply moved by the sense of peace and
community that John had created for us and Michael as we prayed
for the Rabbi in hope and trust. It is a privilege for me to introduce
the other Polish priest, Fr. John Pawlikowski.
James Bernauer, S.J.
Kraft Family Professor of Philosophy
Director, Center for Christian-Jewish Learning
Boston College
4
Pope John Paul II on Christian-Jewish Relations:
His Legacy, Our Challenges
Without question, the papacy of Pope John Paul II will remain on the
historical record as the one in which Christian-Jewish relations
became a central papal priority. To put it bluntly, no previous Pope
had spoken so forcefully and extensively about the Church’s
relationship with the Jewish People. His immediate predecessors
John XXIII and Paul VI certainly need to be celebrated for the
breakthrough actions of their pontificates, especially the
development of chapter four of Vatican II’s Nostra Aetate. But
neither provided the comprehensive vision of Christian-Jewish
bonding left by John Paul II.
Today, I would like to highlight several areas in which Pope John
Paul II made a decisive contribution not only to a constructive
theology of the Christian-Jewish relationship but also to a new sense
of solidarity between our two faith communities, a solidarity that
held together even in moments of crisis such as the Auschwitz
convent controversy. In some areas Pope John Paul II gave us clear
directions in which way our mutual relationship ought to move
without necessarily offering us a fully substantive perspective. That
is where we enter the picture in terms of further clarifying and
deepening his perspective. In short, John Paul II left the Church a
precious legacy whose outlines require further reflection and
implementation on the part of the Church today and in the years
ahead.
The first issue I would bring to the surface is antisemitism. I take up
this central point from John Paul II’s legacy first because he was
uncompromising in criticizing this hatred and contempt for Jews and
Judaism past and present and because his pontificate imprinted a
permanent mark on at least Catholic Christianity—antisemitism can
never be tolerated by a committed Christian. John Paul II condemned
antisemitism in several key speeches and documents, naming it a
5
“sin” which is the strongest religious term one could use in such a
condemnation.1 But he did not stop at verbal condemnation of
antisemitism. He also called for a joint concerted action by Jews and
Christians to combat its remaining presence and any further spread.
The fundamental agreement between Israel and the Vatican signed
during John Paul II’s papacy includes a provision for such concerted
action against antisemitism by the signatories.2
One of the issues connected with antisemitism that John Paul II
never discussed and which remains a thorny question in the
contemporary Christian-Jewish dialogue is the link, if any, between
antisemitism and anti-Zionism. Many in the Jewish community today
would argue that anti-Zionism is in fact now the predominant form
of antisemitism. The counter argument made by some from the
Christian side is that any criticism of the policies of the State of
Israel is labeled as antisemitism by certain Jewish leaders. Clearly
this remains unresolved which has caused increasing tension in the
Christian-Jewish relationship, including within the context of the
Christian-Jewish dialogue itself. Here is one area where our
responsibility takes over from John Paul II’s legacy. I have no easy
solution to the current tension surrounding the antisemitism-anti-
Zionism debate. Suffice it to say that there can be a direct link
between them in some cases as the Pontifical Council on Justice &
Peace noted in its document on racism in 1988.3 A subsequent
statement from the Council prepared for the 2001 United Nations
Conference on Racism mentions the Holocaust and antisemitism but
omits any direct reference to anti-Zionism as a possible form of
1 Pope John Paul II, Crossing the Threshold of Hope. (New York: Alfred A.
Knopf, 1994). 2 For the text of the Fundamental Agreement, cf. Pope John Paul II,
Spiritual Pilgrimage: Texts on Jews and Judaism, 1979-1995, eds. Eugene
J. Fisher and Leon Klenicki. (New York: Anti-Defamation League and
Crossroad, 19915), 203-208. 3 Pontifical Justice and Peace Commission, The Church and Racism:
Towards a More Fraternal Society. (Vatican City, 1988).
6
antisemitism, perhaps as a sign of the tension that developed over
this linkage.4
Any effort to mitigate such tension must be built upon four premises
as I see it. The first is that Israel is a legitimately constituted political
state, a viewpoint that John Paul II definitely endorsed. Secondly,
there is need for a continuing critique of current Israeli governmental
policies as there is equal need for critique of actions by the two
governmental bodies on the Palestinian side. Thirdly, such critique
must studiously avoid any perspective that would delegitimize the
existence of Israel whatever criticisms might be put forward
regarding its current policies. And finally, room needs to be made in
any discussion of the antisemitism-anti-Zionism connection for an
understanding of the spiritual and theological attachment to the land
of Israel by many, though not all, within the global Jewish
community today. Any effort to delink totally biblical notions of the
land and the modern State of Israel ought to be a dialogue non-
starter. To be sure, a connection that fails to account for justice for
all peoples in the region likewise remains a non-starter in my
judgment. Within these parameters hopefully Jews and Christians
can pursue a constructive discussion within a dialogical setting.
There is little question that John Paul II’s firm commitment to
combat antisemitism stemmed from his personal experience of the
Holocaust. He saw the face of evil perpetrated by the Nazis in his
native Poland. He made the connection explicit in a January 1995
“Angelus” address in Rome on the occasion of the fiftieth
anniversary of the release of prisoners from the Auschwitz
concentration camp:
4 Cf. Pontifical Justice and Peace Council, Contribution to World
Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and
Related Intolerance. (Durban, South Africa: September 7, 2001).
7
At Auschwitz, as in other concentration camps, innocent
people of various nationalities died in great numbers. In
particular, the children of the Jewish people, whose
extermination had been planned by the Nazi regime, suffered
the tragic experience of the Holocaust. Recalling the triumph
of evil cannot fail to fill us with deep sorrow, in fraternal
solidarity with all who bear the incredible scars of those
tragedies.
Unfortunately, however, our days continue to be marked by
great violence. God forbid that tomorrow we will have to
weep over other Auschwitzes of our time.
Let us pray and work that this day may not happen. Never
again anti-Semitism! Never again the arrogance of
nationalism! Never again genocide!5
In his September 1987 visit to the United States John Paul II
promised, in a meeting with the American Jewish leadership, that a
document would be forthcoming on antisemitism and the Shoah. For
a variety of reasons, including premature leaks of the proposed
document and disagreements among Curial Cardinals about certain
parts of the draft texts, its appearance was considerably delayed.
There was hope within Catholic and Jewish circles that the eventual
document would have the status of a papal encyclical. But this
regrettably was not to be. Instead, in 1998, the Vatican’s
Commission on Religious Relations with the Jews then headed by
Cardinal Edward Idris Cassidy issued the important document We
Remember: A Reflection on the Shoah.6 To upgrade the status of this
5 Pope John Paul II, “No More Anti-Semitism or Arrogant Nationalism,”
Angelus Address, Vatican City, January 29, 1995 in Pope John II. Spiritual
Pilgrimage, 209. 6 For the text of We Remember, cf. Secretariat for Ecumenical and
Interreligious Affairs, National Conference of Catholic Bishops, Catholics
8
Commission’s document, a papal letter expressing strong support for
the text was included with the publication of the document.7
The document on the Shoah received both praise and criticism both
from Jews and Catholics.8 The fact that the Pope and the Vatican
document so strongly affirmed the reality of the Holocaust undercut
any possibility of Holocaust denial within Catholic circles. The
document also mandated education about the Shoah within
Catholicism on a global basis. It also acknowledged a measure of
complicity on the part of members of the Church, a group that might
well have included the highest leaders in the Catholic Church
according to Cardinal Cassidy.
We Remember was critiqued on several key points. In arguing that
“the Church as such” could not be blamed for complicity in the
Holocaust, but only certain wayward Catholics, a distinction was
introduced which caused considerable controversy because it tended
to separate the Church completely from historical reality, including
collaboration and silence during the Shoah. This distinction, we
know from the testimony of people who spoke to the Pope about this
issue, had his strong personal support. Here is an issue, can “Church
as such” ever be culpable for its actions as an institution in the course
of human history, that John Paul II failed adequately to resolve. It
remains a continuing challenge for the Christian theological
community.
Other issues that have plagued this document have been an overly
positive portrayal of Pope Pius XII during the Nazi era and an
Remember the Holocaust. (Washington, DC: United States Catholic
Conference, 1998), 47-56. 7 Cf., Catholics Remember the Holocaust, 43.
8 Cf. Ethics in the Shadow of the Holocaust: Christian and Jewish
Perspectives, eds. Judith H. Banki and John T. Pawlikowski, OSM.
(Franklin, WI/Chicago: Sheed & Ward, 2001).
9
exaggerated claim about the number of Catholics who helped save
Jews. These two are questions that Catholic historians along with
Jewish historians need to continue to probe. It is unfortunate that the
joint commission set up by Cardinal Cassidy to respond to these
issues in light of the Vatican archives released by Pope Paul VI
during John Paul II’s papacy broke down in controversy. Perhaps if
the Pope himself had taken a greater personal interest in the
deliberations of this joint commission, it may have produced a more
positive result.
One issue on which John Paul II’s stance proved decisive in the end
was that of the convent at Auschwitz. This was without question the
most serious test of his personal commitment to Catholic-Jewish
relations as this deep-seated controversy had the real potential of
unraveling the progress that had been made in the Catholic Church’s
relations with the Jewish People since the issuance of Nostra Aetate
by the II Vatican Council.9
While John Paul II did not act immediately when the crisis first
developed and perhaps had to be nudged into direct involvement by
important Catholic leaders such as the late Cardinal Lustiger of Paris,
he did eventually intervene directly with the cloistered nuns at the
convent urging them to relocate to a non-controversial area beyond
the perimeter of any official map of the concentration camp site.
Once the Pope expressed his view to the sisters the controversy was
quickly defused as nearly all of the sisters agreed to move to the new
location and the few who still objected to the relocation, including
the religious superior, simply left the area for other convents.
The direct action on the part of John Paul II actually opened the door
for the controversy to evolve into a positive development. The
9 For more on this controversy, cf. Memory Offended: The Auschwitz
Convent Controversy, eds. Carol Rittner and John K. Roth. (New
York/Westport, CT/London: Praeger, 1991).
10
eventual construction of the Auschwitz Center for Dialogue and
Prayer adjacent to the relocated convent has become over time an
inspiring center of study and spiritual development in light of
personal encounter with the Auschwitz-Birkenau memorial site. And
the relationship between the Center and the Auschwitz-Birkenau
State Museum leadership has continued to grow with the Museum
now regularly using the Center for some of its programming. To
repeat, none of this in my judgment would have been possible,
despite the important efforts of leaders both in the Christian and
Jewish communities, had John Paul II decided to remain on the
sidelines of the dispute.
Another effort by John Paul II related to the long-awaited political
recognition of Israel by the Holy See. Anyone involved with
Catholic-Jewish relations was well aware that for many in the Jewish
community, whether at the level of leadership or the grassroots, such
recognition was seen as a litmus test of Catholic credibility in terms
of the Church’s outlook towards Judaism and the Jewish People.
I have heard from people who were close to John Paul II’s papacy
that he had on several occasions expressed his sincere interest in
upgrading the Vatican-Israel ties to a full diplomatic relationship but
also his frustration at being constrained in this regard by the Vatican
Secretariat of State. Eventual recognition of Israel by Egypt and
Jordan certainly helped John Paul II overcome this internal Vatican
opposition. And the Pope’s very positive visit to Israel further
solidified this recognition.
As early as 1984, John Paul II showed a deep sensitivity for the
meaning of Israel to the Jewish People. In a Good Friday address that
year he wrote the following:
For the Jewish people who live in the State of Israel and who
preserve on that land such precious testimonies to their
history and their faith, we must ask for the desired security
11
and the due tranquility that is the prerogative of every nation
and the condition of life and progress of every society.10
John Paul II went on to speak movingly of Judaism’s spiritual
attachment to the city of Jerusalem. And on June 15, 1994, the Holy
See and the Israeli government jointly announced the formal
establishment of diplomatic relations as a result of ongoing
negotiations that began with the signing of the Fundamental
Agreement the previous December. Clearly the Fundamental
Agreement represented a central success for John Paul II. It should
be noted that shortly after the signing of the Fundamental Agreement
with the State of Israel, the Vatican Secretariat of State established
ties with the Palestinian Authority as well, probably to help mute any
continuing opposition to the Fundamental Agreement.
As I wrote in the commemorative volume for the establishment of
formal diplomatic relations, this step represented more than merely a
diplomatic agreement. It marked in fact the final repudiation of a
theology of perpetual wandering for the Jewish community on the
part of Christianity that began with the Church Fathers. That
theology argued against any possibility of a restored, sovereign
Jewish state as part of the punishment Jews incurred for rejecting
Jesus and supposingly putting him to death.11
This theology
remained front and center in the official papal response to Theodore
Herzel when he appealed to the Vatican for support of the Zionist
movement at the beginning of the twentieth century.
10
Cf., Spiritual Pilgrimage, eds. Eugene J. Fisher and Leon Klenicki, 34. 11
John T. Pawlikowski, OSM, “The Vatican-Israeli Accords: Their
Implications for Catholic Faith and Teaching,” in “A Challenge Long
Delayed: The Diplomatic Exchange Between the Holy See and the State of
Israel,” eds. Eugene J. Fisher and Leon Klenicki. (New York: Anti-
Defamation League, 1996), 10-19.
12
Despite the positive accomplishments of John Paul II’s papacy with
respect to the theological and political implications of Israel for the
Catholic-Jewish Dialogue, he left many loose ends in both areas. In
the theological realm, considerable reflection is still very much
needed on what role, if any, the biblical land tradition can play in
Christian self-identity. Does the emphasis on fundamental
theological bonding between Jews and Christians that was so much
of a hallmark of John Paul II’s views on the Church’s relationship
with the Jewish People extend to notions of the land tradition in the
Hebrew Scriptures? Can Christian theology incorporate a notion of
the “sacramentality of the land,” as Richard Lux has argued,12
can it
appropriate a “landed faith,” as Walter Brueggeman has termed it,13
or is “land” a theological category that separates Jews and
Christians?14
On the political level I must confess here this evening that I see a
rapid and serious deterioration between Jews and Catholics regarding
the Israeli-Palestinian situation for which John Paul II’s writings
provide only minimal help. For a number of years now, tensions
have been rising between the Jewish community and many parts of
the Protestant/Orthodox world, including the World Council of
Churches. Divestment has been a central point of controversy. Most
of the Catholic community, including at the leadership level, has
stayed apart from this growing tension. But that situation is changing
quickly as Catholic leadership, especially the group of bishops who
have been given an oversight role in terms of Catholic policy
towards the Israeli-Palestinian issue, has begun to speak out ever
more critically with respect to Israeli governmental policies. While
not embracing the divestment approach advocated by a number of
12
Richard Lux, The Jewish People, the Holy Land and the State of Israel.
(Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2010). 13
Walter Brueggeman, The Land. (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1977). 14
John T. Pawlikowski, “Land as an Issue in Christian-Jewish Relations,”
Cross Currents, June 2009: 197-209.
13
Protestant denominations, the language of Catholic leaders has
become far more harsh, including recent statements that have used
the term “prison” to describe the conditions under which the
Palestinians, particularly in the Gaza Strip, are forced to live.
There is no doubt that the Israeli-Palestinian issue is becoming the
eight hundred pound gorilla in the Catholic-Jewish dialogue. Most of
the Catholic criticism is not ultimately theological, even though one
can find some strains of the old “replacement theology” within the
growing critique, particularly from the Palestinian Christian side.
Rather, it concerns concrete actions on the grounds that involve such
issues as border crossings and land confiscation.
I believe this growing controversy has the potential of becoming as
serious as the Auschwitz convent controversy and perhaps even more
so. I cannot go into details in this presentation. But I am increasingly
convinced that a frontal discussion of all the issues must be put on
the dialogue table lest all of the half-century of positive
developments be undermined. There is much blame to go around in
this regard, and I am not prepared to add to the list this evening. I
myself have recently argued that all the major religious traditions in
the region must begin to create a “theology of belonging” with
respect to each other.15
The most imperative need at the moment is
for an honest and open discussion of the situation as it impacts Jews
and Christians.
I would now like to turn to more theological issues within the corpus
of John Paul II’s writings on Christian-Jewish relations. Let me first
highlight a theme that was central for the Pope from early on in his
papacy. It is a notion of a deep-seated “spiritual bonding” between
the two faith communities, one that exists at the level of their basic
15
John T. Pawlikowski, “Ethics in a Globalized World: Implications for the